[[ epub pdf ]] What is Called Thinking? Author Martin Heidegger – Selindameditasyon.com

What is Called Thinking? For an acquaintance with the thought of Heidegger, What Is Called Thinking is as important as Being and Time It is the only systematic presentation of the thinker s late philosophy andit is perhaps the most exciting of his books Hannah Arendt

About the Author: Martin Heidegger

Martin Heidegger 1889 1976 was a German philosopher whose work is perhaps most readily associated with phenomenology and existentialism, although his thinking should be identified as part of such philosophical movements only with extreme care and qualification His ideas have exerted a seminal influence on the development of contemporary European philosophy They have also had an impact far beyond philosophy, for example in architectural theory see e.g., Sharr 2007 , literary criticism see e.g., Ziarek 1989 , theology see e.g., Caputo 1993 , psychotherapy see e.g., Binswanger 1943 1964, Guignon 1993 and cognitive science see e.g., Dreyfus 1992, 2008 Wheeler 2005 Kiverstein and Wheeler forthcoming.

10 thoughts on “What is Called Thinking?

  1. Geoff Geoff says:

    This series of lectures are etymological investigations as much as they are philosophical Or perhaps they should just be called etymological philosophical investigations Through exhaustive etymological philosophical translations of a handful of statements The What is called thinking of the title, Nietzsche s The wasteland grows woe to him who hides wastelands within , and Parmenide

  2. Brandon Brandon says:

    Now, what do I remember about this book The point was something like the following scientific technical thinking isn t really thinking Real thinking is thinking about Being How does one begin to think about Being I Heidegger don t know But this I do know, you have to allow the question of Being to be important You must allow yourself to feel the weight of the question Why is there somethin

  3. Michael Michael says:

    010815 this is a later later addition think i should try to answer the title question with the insistence that what hd is most concerned with is never an answer , but describing the process, which involves close inspection, etymological, historical, emphatic thinking that is, not received wisdom, not recounted theory, not philosophy as a body of knowledge, but as an attitude of questioning which does not mean you should not question him as wellthis is a later addition reading my revi 010815 this is a later later addition think i should try to answer the title question with the insistence that what hd is most concerned with is never an answer , but describing the process, which involves close inspection, etymological, historical, emphatic thinking that is, not received wisdom, not recounted theory, not philosophy as a body of knowledge, but as an attitude of questioning which does not mean you should not question him as wellthis is a later addition reading my review, i discover that i speakof the ways of thinking, the ways of questioning rather than trying to summarize response to the the title question what is called thinking this is not unusual for me, mainly because i want to encourage or qualify something of the questioning experience for the reader if, however, a summary is desired, i suggest this review review this is a curious five often i have given five to introductory, or perceptive but particular work on, rather than by, certain philosophers this rule is broken by two texts by bergson, by husserl, a few collections by bergson, merleau ponty, heidegger, sartre, de beauvoir, which were organized, ordered, and perhaps designed for the reader s progress rather than simply the author s whole thoughtsthis is a curious five because it not only directs inquisitive readers to other work, interests, insures fascination, but is itself a central work that must be read, according to blurbs and intro, as necessary to engage heidegger as his masterwork being and time that was his original, massively influential, incomplete, essential early thought this is a selection of the last lectures he gave, and in word, in thought, characterize and exemplify his later thought or, rather, the innovations of how he will explore his abiding concern the question of being this is not new this is what he started on, this is not a break in subject, object, original ontological precis though it is a new way of asking the question, of compelling thinking what is called thinking is a series of lectures, each with helpful repetition, and though not declaimed in non philosophical poetry, he does use poetry, he gets etymological, he translates, transforms, interprets previous works primarily parmenides but also socrates, plato, aristotle and this is the doubling of a problem for me i read neither german nor greek, so there are two levels of interpretation on the go which i must accept does the greek work that way, how does that work for german, is there significance in german lost in translation to english, is there something that simply confuses, that does not clarify but rather muddies this or that quote, these are all questions inspired by his writing what is called thinking part one goes into nietzsche a lot, and not much in a way i understand, only interesting in his prescient diagnosis of where european man was headed, some time before anyone else was concerned the wasteland grows , well yes that sounds like n the superman overman must be understood as exactly the same and thus heaviest thought as eternal recurrence , must be understood in plain meaning as 1 the passing over 2 the site from which passage leaves 3 the site to which passage goes but this is just all h warming up and then i do not know if i will appreciate n as he should be what is called thinking has four interpretations of the question, all apparently using the same words in german i recall once reading that the seemingly repetitive, nonsensical, deployment of the word being and beings and Being capitalized , was all down to the fact german has several words with the right meaning each case, which all translate into the one english word and that in english you could use existents and Being but then you lose the obvious poetic similarity that reminds of the philosophical kinship or, also, hearing that his exotic name Dasein for something like human being, is in fact common german for be and there so forgive my poor german and greek, i really am not able to follow much of his translation elaboration of the title question what is called thinking offers the four ways that question works in lecture one of part two perhaps part one is all warmup, all setting the stage, training the reader, to understand that there are four ways to understand this apparently transparent question there is 1 what is designated by the word thinking 2 what does the prevailing theory of thought, namely logic, understand by thinking 3 what are the prerequisites we need to perform thinking rightly 4 what is it that commands us to think h asserts we must answer 4 first and that all are one question seen different ways if your mind is not warmed up by now, best read part one again or, like me, soldier on in relative ignorance what is called thinking in 4 can only lead the reader into the twisty ways of translation by way of h, for whom it is the questioning aspect of the question that must be understood, rather than headlong rushes of something traditional and empty as propositions, orders, truths, such as is usual in analytic attempts, answering when you do not yet understand the question and here it comes for me, when to say it is all greek to me is not polite, deprecating escape when the topics addressed escape my limits of thought for yes, it is all greek through german h starts by interpreting the question answer in a new translation one should both say and think that Being is and here is the first hurdle for those who think language and thus corresponding logic are always already there rather than work in progress one should both say and think that Being is sounds like saying the same thing twice not if you are h for whom every word in that translation is in question one should both say and think that Being and most importantly is perhaps had i been taking these lectures over some time with like minded, equally inquisitive, fellow students, i would be able to follow the ins and outs of h s arguments for this or that interpretation translation i am not in his or any prof s class so i think of all the other books i have read somewhat on h 21, and by h 6 some few collections of h s work, some few works by other philosophers such as sartre, merleau ponty, husserl, that engage with his thought i am overwhelmed there is so much, there are a thousand thoughts stimulated by each argument such is the experience of reading h, and why even in my relative ignorance this book must be a five one should both say and think that Being is becomes what the rest of the book is dedicated to explicate, such that i think of later deconstruction and all those post structuralists, postmodernists, of continental lineage, who can noescape h than say nietzsche so i take refuge, i comfort myself, i soften my lack of comprehension, all by finding or recognizing quotes i had read elsewhere or original formulations that i discover again for there is shifting sands, better billowing waves of the ocean as finding words not yet over used to get his ideas across there is the use of thinking, or rather uselessness 1 does not bring knowledge as in sciences 2 does not produce usable practical wisdom 3 solves no cosmic riddles 4 does not endow with power to act this certainly suggests thinking is not dependent, constrained, supported by supporting anything other than thinking one should both say and think that Being is is eventually rendered as needful the saying also thinking too being to be but by the end of this text has become useful is the letting lie before us, so the taking to heart, too beings in being h has led through these two parts, 21 lectures, to something like an answer,a question for a questioning, of what is called thinking but what a long, torturous, difficult way to get there he finally uses unconcealed as something like truth in the last two lectures, something beyond before identity of verifactionist truth theory this is when h s idea of thinking is so much different than the much narrower scientific or instrumental concept of thoughtas i read this book, particularly part two, i began to question the entire process h uses to set and question what is thinking part one, well he refers to nietzsche and it is usual that philosophers build on other philosophers works, so that i could sort of follow but part two isproblematic for me even if in another universe my greek and german was fluent, i do not know it i would agree that tracing heritage of, finding genesis of, comparing meanings of words that a previous series of thinkers used, is necessarily the best way to research your subject or offer your argument is the ancientness of terms closer to truth well that sounds like hermeneutics deployed in religious texts, discovering say ancient christianity is thetruthful christianity regardless of era so i am ambivalent about this entire way of interpretation, not as entirely skeptical about words and representations and so on, but maybe ready forargument i believe that original terms, original translations, are significant not as dogma of thought but as inspiration for further exploratory thinking , as pointing out paths that may lead to clearing of being maybe

  4. Cameron Cameron says:

    This lecture series is as close a companion and critique of Being Time as I ve come across and contains some of the clearest and most profound demonstrations of Heidegger s late thought Throughout this series, he asks what is thinking what calls upon us to think For Heidegger, the intellectual history of the West has been a deviation from the true content of thought the thinking about the Being of beings,

  5. Yonina Hoffman Yonina Hoffman says:

    Excellent working through of Heidegger s question What is called thinking which is actually 4 questions in one To understand thinking we must ask what calls us into thinking what is That which gives us the call toward thinking That is the presence of what is present the Being of beings that we, in attempting to describe lay out before us also perceive, receive, take in take to heart Time is here, too, in the ques

  6. Chris Chris says:

    It s important to understand a couple of facts that help the contemporary reader understand how and why this text gathers so much critical praise and attention.First, Heidegger was heavily ensconced in academia As Rector of the University of Freiburg, his opinions carried considerable weight This did not deter him from conducting an unprecedented, careful and thorough dissection of Western intellectual traditions traditi

  7. Jamie Jamie says:

    A remarkable representation of the phenomenological Heidegger, What Is Called Thinking should be on the required reading list for those desiring to actually think and be capable of transformative thought While certainly a read that merits close attention, its recursive exploration brings forward remarkable insight into the unthinking of our Modern epoch and provides perspective for paths forward.For instance, Heidegger s perspec

  8. Brandon Henke Brandon Henke says:

    With language as his flashlight, Heidegger calls for us to follow him into the daunting and labyrinthine question What is Called Thinking Along the way, one runs into dimly lit dead ends as frequently as one stumbles upon glittering gold With every twist and turn of Heidegger s Brownian motion brain, we encounter innumerable new paths each beckoning for exploration.Naturally, this has the discomforting effect of instilling self doubt Co

  9. Alex Obrigewitsch Alex Obrigewitsch says:

    A great Heidegger book Even one without prior experience in Heidegger can get something from it A valuable reflection of thinking on thought and reflection.

  10. Aried Aried says:

    The core of the book s question is if we can elevate ourselves above the way we are, examine ourselves from the distance of the leap , and depart for somewhere beyond ourselves This leap cannot be possible through a human intention, since an intention can only originate from the way we are It should happen like a thunderstorm, as an unexpected encounter The leap is fatal, if one cannot reach the other end It is only for the ones who dare to leap and go

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *